Risk analysis in surgical oncology-part II: risk and the practising surgeon.

Surgery for cancer imparts a high risk of morbidity and premature mortality. Inappropriate decisions and inadequate information can have a profound effect on the outcome of interventions. A formal process of appraisal of options, aided by modern information technology, may help rationalize and improve management stratagems and reduce risk. Rigorous and obsessional attention to risks in clinical and surgical procedures and processes, including the selection and training of surgeons, process and human reliability analysis, and ubiquitous error reduction strategies will also help minimize risk. These approaches will have a significant bearing on familiar surgical practice and will need to be extended across the multidisciplinary spectrum of cancer care.     

Optimized outcome prediction in breast cancer by combining the 70-gene signature with clinical risk prediction algorithms

Clinical guidelines for breast cancer treatment differ in their selection of patients at a high risk of recurrence who are eligible to receive adjuvant systemic treatment (AST). The 70-gene signature is a molecular tool to better guide AST decisions. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether adding the 70-gene signature to clinical risk prediction algorithms can optimize outcome prediction and consequently treatment decisions in early stage, node-negative breast cancer patients. A 70-gene signature was available for 427 patients participating in the RASTER study (cT1-3N0M0). Median follow-up was 61.6 months. Based on 5-year distant-recurrence free interval (DRFI) probabilities survival areas under the curve (AUC) were calculated and compared for risk estimations based on the six clinical risk prediction algorithms: Adjuvant! Online (AOL), Nottingham Prognostic Index (NPI), St. Gallen (2003), the Dutch National guidelines (CBO 2004 and NABON 2012), and PREDICT plus. Also, survival AUC were calculated after adding the 70-gene signature to these clinical risk estimations. Systemically untreated patients with a high clinical risk estimation but a low risk 70-gene signature had an excellent 5-year DRFI varying between 97.1 and 100 %, depending on the clinical risk prediction algorithms used in the comparison. The best risk estimation was obtained in this cohort by adding the 70-gene signature to CBO 2012 (AUC: 0.644) and PREDICT (AUC: 0.662). Clinical risk estimations by all clinical algorithms improved by adding the 70-gene signature. Patients with a low risk 70-gene signature have an excellent survival, independent of their clinical risk estimation. Adding the 70-gene signature to clinical risk prediction algorithms improves risk estimations and therefore might improve the identification of early stage node-negative breast cancer patients for whom AST has limited value. In this cohort, the PREDICT plus tool in combination with the 70-gene signature provided the best risk prediction.     

The current status of risk-stratified breast screening

Apart from high-risk scenarios such as the presence of highly penetrant genetic mutations, breast screening typically comprises mammography or tomosynthesis strategies defined by age. However, age-based screening ignores the range of breast cancer risks that individual women may possess and is antithetical to the ambitions of personalised early detection. Whilst screening mammography reduces breast cancer mortality, this is at the risk of potentially significant harms including overdiagnosis with overtreatment, and psychological morbidity associated with false positives. In risk-stratified screening, individualised risk assessment may inform screening intensity/interval, starting age, imaging modality used, or even decisions not to screen. However, clear evidence for its benefits and harms needs to be established. In this scoping review, the authors summarise the established and emerging evidence regarding several critical dependencies for successful risk-stratified breast screening: risk prediction model performance, epidemiological studies, retrospective clinical evaluations, health economic evaluations and qualitative research on feasibility and acceptability. Family history, breast density or reproductive factors are not on their own suitable for precisely estimating risk and risk prediction models increasingly incorporate combinations of demographic, clinical, genetic and imaging-related parameters. Clinical evaluations of risk-stratified screening are currently limited. Epidemiological evidence is sparse, and randomised trials only began in recent years.Subject terms: Breast cancer, Cancer epidemiology     

Surgery versus surveillance in stage I non-seminoma testicular cancer

Today, the standard treatment for patients with clinical Stage I non-seminomatous testicular germ cell tumors (NSTGCT) following orchidectomy is either primary retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) or close surveillance with cisplatin-based polychemotherapy in case of a relapse. Both treatment modalities provide excellent overall survival rates up to 100%. Consequently, selection of the most appropriate management option is not primarily guided by survival considerations. The choice between the available options, each having its merits and its drawbacks, should be made based on a number of factors including treatment-related morbidity, views and expertise of the physician, patient preferences, the expected degree of patient compliance, and prognostic factor analysis. To date, the role of adjuvant chemotherapy as an alternative management option for patients with clinical Stage I NSTGCT at high risk of occult metastases is limited. This systemic treatment modality would be a realistic alternative if the reliability of prognostic factors to identify high-risk Stage I patients could be improved. This review addresses relevant issues in the management of patients with clinical Stage I NSTGCT to provide information that will allow a rational selection of the most appropriate management option.     

The role of radiation therapy in the management of thyroid cancer

The goal of this article is to review the various indications for the application of external beam radiotherapy in the management of thyroid cancer. This article includes a discussion of published literature to define risk variables that increase the risk of recurrence after surgery that might be mitigated by the use of radiation therapy. Clinical outcomes, recent technologic advances in treatment planning and radiation delivery, and potential morbidity associated with treatment are also reviewed.     

Management of the axilla after the finding of a positive sentinel lymph node: a proposal for an evidence-based risk-adapted algorithm

Axillary lymph node dissection after the finding of a positive sentinel lymph node is a common clinical practice. A review is performed for the efficacy and morbidity of axillary lymph node dissection, the rationale for nonsurgical management of the axilla, and the efficacy, technical limitations, and toxicity of axillary radiation therapy; a management algorithm is then proposed based upon currently available prediction tools.     

Acute morbidity of proton therapy for prostate cancer: the Hyogo Ion Beam Medical Center experience

PURPOSE: To investigate the incidence and influencing factors of acute genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal morbidities in patients with prostate cancer treated with proton therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 287 patients with histologically proven Stage cT1-T4N0M0 prostate cancer were treated with proton therapy between 2003 and 2004. Of these, 204 (71%) received neoadjuvant androgen suppression therapy. The patients were treated with 190-230-MeV protons using lateral-opposed techniques to a dose of 74 GyE. Dose-volume histogram analyses were performed. The incidence of acute morbidity was evaluated using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria, version 2.0. Clinical factors, including age, clinical target volume, initial prostate-specific antigen level, T stage, presence of diabetes mellitus, and the use of androgen suppression therapy, were investigated to determine whether those affected the incidence of acute GU morbidity. RESULTS: None developed Grade 2 or higher acute gastrointestinal morbidity. In contrast, 111 (39%) and 4 (1%) patients experienced acute Grade 2 and Grade 3 GU morbidities, respectively. However, 87% of the patients were successfully relieved by the administration of a selective alpha-1 blocker. Multivariate analysis showed that a larger clinical target volume (p = 0.001) and the use of androgen suppression therapy (p = 0.017) were significant factors for the prediction of acute Grade 2-3 GU morbidity. CONCLUSION: In our experience with proton therapy, a low incidence of acute gastrointestinal morbidity was observed. In contrast, the incidence of acute GU morbidity was similar to that in other reports of photon radiotherapy. Additional follow-up is warranted to elucidate the long-term safety and efficacy of proton therapy for prostate cancer.     

Effect of a Rule-in Biomarker Test on Pulmonary Nodule Management: A Survey of Pulmonologists and Thoracic Surgeons

IntroductionThe field of biomarker development is evolving to assist in determining benign from malignant pulmonary nodules. Although a prospective clinical utility would best to show how a biomarker affects patient treatment and outcomes, we sought to begin to understand how the results might alter management by determining how physicians would use the results of a rule-in blood test to manage pulmonary nodules.Materials and MethodsPulmonologists and thoracic surgeons in the American College of Chest Physicians clinician database were invited to participate in an online survey. The participant demographic data were collected. Four hypothetical clinical vignettes were presented. The participants accessed the pretest probability (probability of cancer [pCA]) for malignancy and chose the management strategies as the case progressed. The management strategies chosen before and after the result of a rule-in biomarker test were compared and assessed for guideline concordance.ResultsOf the 455 eligible participants who had opened the survey, 416 (92%) completed it: 332 pulmonologists and 84 thoracic surgeons. Although 91% of the participants were very comfortable managing nodules, depending on the case, 30% to 62% incorrectly assessed the pCA, with 22% to 62% overestimating the risk and 8% to 51% underestimating the risk. After a rule-in blood test result, the clinician change in management moved in the right direction in some cases but, in others, the physicians used the results incorrectly. Pulmonologists and thoracic surgeons differed in the management strategies, with surgeons recommending surgery more often.ConclusionsAlthough the use of biomarker testing for pulmonary nodule evaluation is promising, without proper physician education, the potential for harm exists. Clinical utility studies are needed to appropriately inform the effect of biomarker use.     

Risk prediction models for colorectal cancer: a review

Risk prediction models are important to identify individuals at high risk of developing the disease who can then be offered individually tailored clinical management, targeted screening and interventions to reduce the burden of disease. They are also useful for research purposes when attempting to identify new risk factors for the disease. In this article, we review the risk prediction models that have been developed for colorectal cancer and appraise their applicability, strengths, and weaknesses. We also discuss the factors to be considered for future development and improvement of models for colorectal cancer risk prediction. We conclude that there is no model that sufficiently covers the known risk factors for colorectal cancer that is suitable for assessment of people from across the full range of risk and that a new comprehensive model is needed.     

A proposed Clino-radio-pathological Risk Scoring System (CRiSS) for prediction and management of inguinal lymph-nodes metastasis in squamous cell carcinoma of the penis

ObjectiveTo develop a risk scoring system for prediction of inguinal lymph-node involvement and to suggest a management strategy according to the risk groups based on clinical, radiological and pathological parameters in squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of penis.Materials and MethodsA retrospective analysis of all patients of SCC penis from 2014 to 2020 at our institute was done. The patients were divided into derivation cohort (2014 to 2019) and validation cohort (2019 to 2020). A total of 10 predictors were analysed in univariate analysis and those found significant were further subjected to multivariate analysis to derive regression coefficient for each. CRiSS scores were assigned based on the coefficients and three groups were created which were correlated with nodal metastasis. The predictive accuracy of the model was assessed by ROC analysis of the derivation cohort and validation cohort.ResultsA total of 102 patients were identified in derivation cohort and 23 patients in validation cohort. Size of the primary >3cm, ulceroinfiltrative growth, involving shaft, ultrasound size of lymph-nodes >1cm, loss of fatty hila, moderate and poor differentiation, and lypmphovascular/perineural invasion were independent predictors of inguinal lymphnode metastasis in multivariate analysis. CRiSS could achieve AUROC of .910 and .887 in derivation and validation cohort respectively. The rate of metastatic lymphadenopathy was 0%, 41.4%, and 89.5% in low, intermediate, and high-risk groups respectively.ConclusionsCRiSS can effectively predict inguinal lymph-node metastasis in SCC penis. We suggest a management strategy based on risk groups that will avoid morbidity of groin dissection in many patients.     

Clinical benefits of a multivariate prediction model for bladder cancer

BACKGROUND:

It has been demonstrated that multivariate prediction models predict cancer outcomes more accurately than cancer stage; however, the effects of these models on clinical management are unclear. The objective of the current study was to determine whether a previously published multivariate prediction model for bladder cancer (“bladder nomogram”) improved medical decision making when referral for adjuvant chemotherapy was used as a model.

METHODS:

Data were analyzed from an international cohort study of 4462 patients who underwent cystectomy without chemotherapy from 1969 to 2004. The number of patients eligible for chemotherapy was determined using pathologic stage criteria (lymph node‐positive disease or pathologic T3 [pT3] or pT4 tumor classification) and for 3 cutoff levels on the bladder nomogram (10%, 25%, and 70% risk of recurrence with surgery alone). The number of recurrences was calculated by applying a relative risk reduction to the baseline risk among eligible patients. Clinical net benefit was then calculated by combining recurrences and treatments and weighting the latter by a factor related to drug tolerability.

RESULTS:

A nomogram cutoff outperformed pathologic stage for chemotherapy in every scenario of drug effectiveness and tolerability. For a drug with a relative risk of 0.80, with which clinicians would treat ≤20 patients to prevent 1 recurrence, use of the nomogram was equivalent to a strategy that resulted in 60 fewer chemotherapy treatments per 1000 patients without any increase in recurrence rates.

CONCLUSIONS:

The authors concluded that referring patients who undergo cystectomy to adjuvant chemotherapy on the basis of a multivariate model is likely to lead to better patient outcomes than the use of pathologic stage. Further research is warranted to evaluate the clinical effects of multivariate prediction models. Cancer 2009. © 2009 American Cancer Society.     

Recognition and management of hereditary breast cancer syndromes

Clinicians should recognize the genetic syndromes that predispose to the development of breast cancer so that patients may be afforded the opportunity to have genetic testing to assist them and their family members in making medical management decisions. Approximately 80%-90% of hereditary breast cancer cases are caused by mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Other important clinical genetic predispositions include Cowden syndrome, Li-Fraumeni syndrome, Peutz-Jeghers syndrome, and ataxia-telangiectasia. The key to identifying women who are at risk for a hereditary breast cancer lies in obtaining an adequate, three-generation family history, including ethnic background. For unaffected women, breast cancer risks can be estimated using the quantitative models of Gail and Claus, but there are limitations to these models. Other quantitative models predict the likelihood that a patient is carrying a mutated gene. Genetic testing is available at selected laboratories for each of the hereditary syndromes described, and there are three possible outcomes to testing. These outcomes and their management implications are described in detail. Clinical management options for women at high risk for breast cancer include surveillance, chemoprevention, and prophylactic surgery. Application of these principles can reduce morbidity in women with genetic predispositions to breast cancer.     

Impact of a genomic classifier of metastatic risk on postoperative treatment recommendations for prostate cancer patients: a report from the DECIDE study group

Background

Only a minority of prostate cancer patients with adverse pathology and biochemical recurrence (BCR) post radical prostatectomy (RP) experience metastasis and die from prostate cancer. Improved risk prediction models using genomic information may enable clinicians to better weigh the risk of metastasis and the morbidity and costs of treatment in a clinically heterogeneous population.

Purpose

We present a clinical utility study that evaluates the influence on urologist treatment recommendations for patients at risk of metastasis using a genomic-based prediction model (Decipher^TM).

Methods

A prospective, pre-post design was used to assess urologist treatment recommendations following RP in both the adjuvant (without any evidence of PSA rise) and salvage (BCR) settings. Urologists were presented de-identified pathology reports and genomic classifier (GC) test results for 24 patients from a previously conducted GC validation study in high-risk post-RP men. Participants were fellowship trained, high-volume urologic oncologists (n=21) from 18 US institutions. Treatment recommendations for secondary therapy were made based solely on clinical information (pre-GC) and then with genomic biomarker information (post-GC). This study was approved by an independent IRB.

Results

Treatment recommendations changed from pre-GC to post-GC in 43% of adjuvant, and in 53% of salvage setting case evaluations. In the adjuvant setting, urologists changed their treatment recommendations from treatment (i.e. radiation and/or hormones) to close observation post-GC in 27% of cases. For cases with low GC risk (<3% risk of metastasis), observation was recommended for 79% of the case evaluations post-GC. Consistent trends were observed in the salvage setting.

Conclusion

These results indicate that urologists across a range of practice settings are likely to change treatment decisions when presented with genomic biomarker information following RP. Implementation of genomic risk stratification into routine clinical practice may better direct treatment decision-making post-RP.     

Association de radiothérapie et d’hormonothérapie dans la prise en charge des cancers localisés de la prostate : où en est-on ?

Radiotherapy and androgen deprivation therapy play a major role in the management of prostate cancer. Indeed, radiotherapy and hormone therapy are combined in a neoadjuvant and concomitant setting for intermediate risk cancers but also in an adjuvant setting in high risk or locally advanced prostate cancer. The benefice of this association was suggested by preclinical studies and demonstrated later by several randomized trials. However, as these trials were conducted before the era of dose escalation the role of androgen deprivation therapy in this case is less clear. Moreover, as hormonal therapy can lead to a significant morbidity and a decrement in quality of life its indications must be carefully weighed especially in case of intermediate risk cancer witch represent a heterogeneous group with distinct prognostic subgroups.     

Current diagnostic approaches to invasive candidiasis in critical care settings

For the specialist, the management of invasive candidiasis infections, from diagnosis to selection of the therapeutic protocol, is often a challenge. Although early diagnosis and treatment are associated with a better prognosis, apart from cases with positive blood cultures or fluid/tissue biopsy, diagnosis is neither sensitive nor specific, relying on many different factors, clinical and laboratory findings but there is certainly a need for the specific markers in this disease. Recently, new serodiagnostic assays as Candida albicans germ‐tube antibodies or (1,3)‐β‐d ‐glucan detection and molecular techniques for the detection of fungal‐specific DNA have been developed with controversial results in critical care setting. One of the main features in diagnosis is the evaluation of risk factor for infection, which will identify patients in need of preemptive or empirical treatment. Clinical scores were built from those risk factors. For these reasons, an approach to the new diagnosis tools in the clinical mycology laboratory and an analysis of the new prediction rules and its application situations has been made. Currently, the combination of prediction rules and non‐culture microbiological tools could be the clue for improving the diagnosis and prognosis of invasive fungal infections in critically ill patients.     

Cardiovascular risk management in cancer survivors: Are we doing it right?

Although under-recognized, cancer survivors continue to be at an increased risk of death from cardiovascular complications post-remission or cure. This increased burden of cardiovascular disease results from the interplay of various factors. Adequate cardiovascular risk assessment and timely intervention through a multi-disciplinary approach in these patients plays a pivotal role in the prevention of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. We discuss the shortcomings of using current risk prediction scores in cancer survivors and provide some insights into cardiovascular risk management relevant for primary care physicians, oncologists, and cardiologists alike.     

Quality management for clinical trials within the German Competence Network Paediatric Oncology and Haematology

The German 'Competence Network Paediatric Oncology and Haematology' aims at improving the structure of paediatric oncology and haematology as a whole, focussing in particular on the quality of clinical trials and study co-ordinating centres. This comprises the following measures: (1) Employment of research and trial assistants in order to improve the quality of documentation and study management in the participating hospitals. (2) Development of an internet portal to provide medical information for non-professionals, for patients and their families as well as for health professionals. (3) The project group 'Central Trial Support' supports study centres during the process of writing and examining new treatment protocols so that they are in compliance with the Good Clinical Practice criteria, formal criteria, legal requirements and statutory provisions. This group currently produces a structural standardisation of study protocols and case record forms in order to improve their usability. The 'Competence Network Malignant Lymphomas' is a project with similar aims and will be outlined for comparison.     

Screening for prostate cancer: opportunities and challenges

Prostate cancer screening with PSA and with digital rectal examination isa reality in the United States. Regardless of recent observations regarding the complexities of PSA interpretation, millions of U.S. men expect an annual PSA test and physicians have come to rely on the test, in combination with digital rectal examination, to assess for prostate cancer risk. What has become evident is that PSA can no longer be interpreted dichotomously as a simple yes or no. The test reflects a range of risk and PSA value must be merged with other risk factors of an individual man including ethnicity, family history, as well as the individual's risk aversion to complications from prostate cancer. The future of prostate cancer screening will be built upon incorporation of new biomarkers to the prediction of risk of disease. As these markers move forward in testing, it will no longer be acceptable to move these into clinical usage without formal validation studies and, because of the high frequency of prostate cancer in the general male population, these validation studies will almost certainly have to include measures of prognosis. It is the holy grail of cancer biomarker development to acquire a test that is positive in the man with clinically-aggressive prostate cancer but is negative in both the patient without disease and in the man with disease that will be of no clinical consequence over his lifetime.     

Primary diffuse large B-cell lymphoma of the breast: looking at pathogenesis,clinical issues and therapeutic options

Primary breast lymphoma is a rare form of non-Hodgkin lymphoma with some distinct clinical features. The most common histopathological type is diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), but other less frequent subtypes are also encountered. In this review, we describe the characteristics of primary breast DLBCL, with emphasis on pathogenesis, staging, risk stratification and prognosis. In addition, key issues regarding therapy and various available therapeutic modalities are addressed, as well as the role of rituximab in therapy and whether central nervous system prophylaxis is still routinely required. There are very few prospective clinical studies addressing therapy, and available data rely mostly on retrospective case series involving small numbers of patients. Our conclusions and proposed recommendations are therefore not offered as formal guidelines. This review attempts to represent an unbiased analysis of the published data and is intended as a useful aid for clinicians treating this uncommon type of extra nodal lymphoma.     

Adjuvant therapy in primary GIST: state-of-the-art

BackgroundThe management of primary gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) has evolved with the introduction of adjuvant therapy. Recently reported results of the SSG XVIII/AIO trial by the Scandinavian Sarcoma Group (SSG) and the German Working Group on Medical Oncology (AIO) represent a significant change in the evidence for adjuvant therapy duration. The objectives of this European Expert Panel meeting were to describe the optimal management and best practice for the systemic adjuvant treatment of patients with primary GISTs.Materials and methodsA panel of medical oncology experts from European sarcoma research groups were invited to a 1-day workshop. Several questions and discussion points were selected by the organising committee prior to the conference. The experts reviewed the current literature of all clinical trials available on adjuvant therapy for primary GISTs, considered the quality evidence and formulated recommendations for each discussion point.ResultsClinical issues were identified and provisional clinical opinions were formulated for adjuvant treatment patient selection, imatinib dose, duration and patient recall, mutational analysis and follow-up of primary GIST patients. Adjuvant imatinib 400 mg/day for 3 years duration is a standard treatment in all patients with significant risk of recurrence following resection of primary GISTs. Patient selection for adjuvant therapy should be based on any of the three commonly used patient risk stratification schemes. R1 surgery (versus R0) alone is not an indication for adjuvant imatinib in low-risk GIST. Recall and imatinib restart could be proposed in patients who discontinued 1-year adjuvant imatinib within the previous 3 months and may be considered on a case-by-case basis in patients who discontinued within the previous year. Mutational analysis is recommended in all cases of GISTs using centralised laboratories with good quality control. Treatment is not recommended in an imatinib-insensitive D842V-mutated GIST. During adjuvant treatment, patients are recommended to be clinically assessed at 1- to 3-month intervals. Upon discontinuation, computed tomography scan (CT) scans are recommended every 3 to 4 months for 2 years when the risk of relapse is highest, followed by every 6 months until year 5 and annually until year 10 after treatment discontinuation.ConclusionsKey points in systemic adjuvant treatment and clinical management of primary GISTs as well as open questions were identified during this European Expert Panel meeting on GIST management.